Vagueness and Bayesian Probability

Nic Wilson

doi:10.1109/91.273121

Vagueness and Bayesian Probability

Nic Wilson

Queen Mary University of London

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

This paper is a response to Michael Laviolette and John W. Seaman Jr.’s position paper “The efficacy of fuzzy representations of uncertainty,” which criticizes fuzzy representations of uncertainty, and suggests that Bayesian probability can do better. I argue that the author’s make some misleading comments about Bayesian probability, and I briefly discuss the problem of giving a satisfactory interpretation of membership functions.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	34-36
Number of pages	3
Journal	IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems
Volume	2
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1109/91.273121
Publication status	Published - Feb 1994
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1109/91.273121

Cite this

@article{adc8eee2655e48b6a26eca8ee9632a29,

title = "Vagueness and Bayesian Probability",

abstract = "This paper is a response to Michael Laviolette and John W. Seaman Jr.{\textquoteright}s position paper “The efficacy of fuzzy representations of uncertainty,” which criticizes fuzzy representations of uncertainty, and suggests that Bayesian probability can do better. I argue that the author{\textquoteright}s make some misleading comments about Bayesian probability, and I briefly discuss the problem of giving a satisfactory interpretation of membership functions.",

author = "Nic Wilson",

year = "1994",

month = feb,

doi = "10.1109/91.273121",

language = "English",

volume = "2",

pages = "34--36",

journal = "IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems",

issn = "1063-6706",

publisher = "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Vagueness and Bayesian Probability

AU - Wilson, Nic

PY - 1994/2

Y1 - 1994/2

N2 - This paper is a response to Michael Laviolette and John W. Seaman Jr.’s position paper “The efficacy of fuzzy representations of uncertainty,” which criticizes fuzzy representations of uncertainty, and suggests that Bayesian probability can do better. I argue that the author’s make some misleading comments about Bayesian probability, and I briefly discuss the problem of giving a satisfactory interpretation of membership functions.

AB - This paper is a response to Michael Laviolette and John W. Seaman Jr.’s position paper “The efficacy of fuzzy representations of uncertainty,” which criticizes fuzzy representations of uncertainty, and suggests that Bayesian probability can do better. I argue that the author’s make some misleading comments about Bayesian probability, and I briefly discuss the problem of giving a satisfactory interpretation of membership functions.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0028370248

U2 - 10.1109/91.273121

DO - 10.1109/91.273121

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0028370248

SN - 1063-6706

VL - 2

SP - 34

EP - 36

JO - IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems

JF - IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems

IS - 1

ER -

Vagueness and Bayesian Probability

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this